This is a public investigation over public injuries, loss, deaths, property/mismanagement of funds, other landlord responsibilities such as not listening to complaints and intimidation and the responses of public emergency services – let’s not add further mismanagement to the equation by making this an ‘inquiry’. The phrase ‘public inquiry‘ has always set my teeth on edge because they’re usually presided over people far removed from the public and what they go through e.g. Lords. And then what about actionable punishment? Oh yeah, that doesn’t really happen with inquiries – you get masses of report, observations, ideas, commentary and little else – and who is going to pay for it? It could cost more than the paltry 5 million fund Theresa May has promised to the victims, that won’t even accommodation let alone new homes. Then there’s no deadline, we’ve been promised interim reports but this could go on with parties passing the buck until the urgency of the situation has passed (sorry to say but damage limitation is preferred by some than taking responsibility for what they’ve done and it’s better for them in a less outraged environment when we’ve had other news take primary attention). The judges that sit at these inquiries tend to distance themselves afterwards as well because the public generally isn’t happy at the end but still, it’s better than an…

INQUEST.

Exactly the word that has been on my mind since I heard about Grenfell Tower. Not ‘inquiry’ but the voices in my head have been trying to go for ‘inquiry’ and making me forget. Thanks to the following article I snapped awake. I want a proper investigation with legal standing and that’s just me and outsider, can you imagine the victims of this situation and their loved ones? An inquiry is just a formal enquiry e.g. (not technical but a colloquial example) a person makes an enquiry, an establishment makes an inquiry – however both are just asking a question and in official Inquiries parties are presenting evidence they’re not necessarily being examined. Information comes out of an inquiry (without summary), not necessarily the ‘truth’ and there is no culpability. An Inquest is a trial.

Grenfell Tower residents should demand an inquest rather than a public inquiry to get answers about the tragedy, according to a solicitor who acted for people affected in the 2009 Lakanal House fire.

Sophie Khan said that in an inquest the Government would “lose control” and a jury would be able to deliver its conclusion regardless of whether it was uncomfortable to hear.

In a public inquiry, such as that ordered by the Prime Minister into the fire that killed at least 17 on Wednesday, a minister will set the terms of reference, which guide how the hearings proceed.

Ms Khan told BBC Newsnight: “In an inquest they lose control of what a jury verdict will do. Juries will come out with narrative verdicts which may be very difficult for the Government to hear.

“You can’t have both, you can only have one or the other. They [residents] should really be demanding an inquest.

“I’m very concerned as to why Ms May came out so quickly to say, ‘public inquiry’. What is there, that she knows, that needs to be hidden?”

She added: “We have to look at the fire assessments because here there is a fire issue as well. It’s not just the council we need to look at. What were the fire brigade doing? Refurbishments have been done, what tests did they do on the building?”

Ms May has said there will be a “proper investigation” following the Grenfell Tower fire, adding that if there are “any lessons to be learned they will be, and action will be taken”.

Announcing the inquiry, she added: “We need to ensure that this terrible tragedy is properly investigated. People deserve answers. The inquiry will give them.”

Downing Street declined to comment further when approached by The Independent.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan said residents were “understandably very angry” that previous concerns had not been addressed in one of the wealthiest areas of the UK, calling for the inquiry’s leading judge to release an interim report over the summer.

Inquest Not Inquiry – we’re going for justice not just information. Suspicious circumstances = INQUEST. Make them legally accountable, don’t just offer recommendations that rarely see the light of day.